I don't see why them being unique is so surprising. Faces are unique after all. All of us have a unique genome, apart from identical twins. Still even twins have different fingerprints and hair follicles and so on are in different places. I guess when embryos develop the process for skin folding and hair follicle development is slightly random - i.e. the genes encode the probability of a fair follicle, not its exact location.
There's the Moonlight package for Linux and since Adobe makes money licensing FlashLite to embedded devices it's reasonable to assume that Microsoft will do the same.
In fact the business model of Adobe Flash could be summarised as this: available on a majority of desktop platforms and with a free player but expensive to developers and expensive to port to other platforms, e.g. phones.
The 1930's. The decade that brought you the Depression, the Nazis, batshit crazy Japanese militarists attempting genocide in China and Stalin's purges. It sort of makes sense USB was invented then.
It's not mainstream. It's like some Japanese guy put it to me "we think those guys reading violent pornography on the subway are weird too". I think these people exist in the UK but it's just that in the UK this stuff is illegal so it's not a good idea to look at it in public. More to the point, if you sat on the train reading this next to someone with kids they would flip out completely. Japanese people don't flip out and as far as I know the police ignore this sort of thing.
What I think is odd is that Japan has quite strict censorship for nudity in movies on TV for example, which these days is more or less acceptable in the UK.
Well yes and no. I wouldn't want to go to a bar with anyone that had fantasies about raping people. In fact I once worked in a very geeky company with someone who, when drunk, had on several occasions said things very much along those lines. What was interesting was how people reacted. As time went by people stoppen inviting him to stuff. In fact I noticed someone was emailing to an ALL-LONGSITENAME-OK list instead of ALL-LONGSITENAME-UK and what the difference was. He said that he cloned ALL-LONGSITENAME-UK into his own list and removed people that were widely regarded even there as being socially unacceptable. Obviously at that point I asked who he took off the list and it was only 2 people out of 100.
Now bear in mind these people were in the geekiest 1% of the population. And this guy was widely believed to be in bottom 2% in terms of socialisation even there, to the point where a consensus arose to not invite him to stuff.
He was plain creepy though - in the events the company organised where everyone got invited he kept turning up with different and very obviously underage girls each time.
Damnit, I was just working out how long a RapeRacer skin of TuxRacer would take.
Incidentally the odd thing about this is that controversy works. You could build the skin, knock a website and make a profit on the ads alone. Then again, bad taste stuff like this would probably get pulled from the Google index and the ad providers would probably blacklist you once someone complained.
Hmm maybe controversy doesn't work. Or maybe you need to be more subtle about how you troll people. There are loads of tech columns that get traffic because they are trolling. In a sense it reminds me of the Malcolm McLaren line about 'cash from chaos'.
I think the most important task for bands that sing about the death of the music industry is to develop innovative new forms of distribution to maximize both their fans return on their investment and also their leveraging their own IP holdings. In many ways the task they face is strkingly similar to that faced by skilled professionals in other industries, particularly financial advisers who wish to be self employed following Thatcher's brilliant deregulation of the City in the 80's.
I work as an adviser for several punk bands. I always turn up in a smart designer suit and lecture them on economics. Which they seem appreciative of. However occasionally I've pointed out a few basic economic errors in their lyrics and suggested ways they could improve them without messing up the flow of the song. I also recommended they read Hayek's The Road to Serfdom and mentioned an essay by Milton Friedman. And actually I've written a few songs myself, about the economic liberalisation in the 80's and 90's in Chile and China.
For some reason at that point the meeting seemed to become a bit frosty.
Actually to be honest I don't bother to invoice them for the advice. I'm secretely filming the meetings for mockumentary I intend to distribute on the net for free.
That's a horrible approach to economics and simply isn't true.
Imagine you've a city of 100,000 or so where 90% of people earn their money working on a massive copper
If 90% of the people in the town were working on a copper, wouldn't the bastard go down? I don't care how massive he is. Big chavs would be kicking and punching him, little chavspawn would jump on him and gnaw and burrow. I reckon the guy would be ex filth pretty quickly.
I saw the Staines massive attack a copper. They're much less than 90% of the town and most of them are under 16 and they're so weeded up they can't run. Didn't take long.
The Chrome people say that you're getting a patent license for H.264, etc. if you use Chrome. Fine.
The interesting question is "Does my patent license for H.264, etc. extend to any decoding, or only that done by Chrome?". Said in another way, is my patent license only good if I'm doing the decoding in Chrome or does it apply to decoding done by me? If it is the latter, then anyone who wants a patent license can just download Chrome -- now they have a free patent license.
I think the fact that if the patent license applied to decoding done by software other than Chrome then everyone could get a patent license strongly implies it doesn't. I.e. the patent holders won't sue Google and they won't sue users of Google's software. If those users use other software that decodes H.264 I can't believe that the patent holders have agreed not to sue them.
And this is what I was thinking. I'm very confused, but I'm also not an American. What does the Federal Trade Commission have to do with acting on illegal material such as the crazy stuff suggested by the article?
I'm an American and what's really happening is this. The corrupt Obama junta is trying to silence its critics by falsely labelling them spammers and child pornographers.
Rafael from WithinWindows investigated and found that this "blocking" behaviour does exist, but it seems to be functioning in a way that indicates it is there temporarily. This was Microsoft's comment on the issue:
As we move toward the release of Windows 7, we have worked to add more codecs and file types to allow for a better user experience. We also allow Microsoft experiences to use codecs and other format technologies from third-party companies, just as we always have. Third party applications can use the Microsoft codecs or their own. Microsoft does not restrict the use of third-party codecs. - Microsoft Spokesperson
The possibility of Microsoft imposing such a strange restriction and alienating its many users seemed unlikely anyway.
I suppose you'd rather we all listened to folksongs sung by one legged ethnic minority lesbians whilst eating lentils in a commune. A commune of POETS and ARTISTS!. No Sir! That is not what America is about. America is about Bud, junk food, guitar riffs and callipygian dancers shot with a handycam.
45 engineer years was what they needed to take an Arm Cortex A8 and rework it changing the clock speed from 600Mhz to 1Ghz on a given process.
To compete with x86 you'd need to go quite a bit further than this. Actually I wonder if ARM is the right architecture for high performance desktop stuff - maybe it's a good architecture for simple single issue in order designs with shallow pipelines but not good if you want OOO, superscalar and superpipelined. The x86 chips AMD and Intel make tend to do all this stuff. They also break down x86 instructions into uops. No Arm chip does this but it seems to be key to decent x86 performance.
I don't have Hennessy and Patterson to hand here, but I wonder if Arm's elegant instruction set might have some issues for uberchips. Apparently MIPS had the most pipeline friendly instruction set, and that is a really stripped down machine compared to Arm. Back when IA64 came out people argued that MIPS like Risc chips like Alpha weren't ideal for superscalar implementations because the processor has to schedule in hardware. IA64 was supposed to be Explicitly Parallel. Of course it turned out to be a turkey.
Still my guess is that if you wanted to dethrone x86 you'd be better off picking an instruction set which was natural to implement in with OOO, superscalar and so on. Then like Risc it would be close to the way high performance desktop chips are implemented for a few generations and would have a built in advantage.
As far as I can tell they didn't do that with Snapdragon. It's a fast chip by Arm standards, but the memory subsystem is very similar to their previous chips. Then again that's probably because they're interested in selling chips for cellphones rather than notebooks.
Now Snapdragon is great for the cellphones but and I don't see why they should start to build chips for the netbook market where Arm is competing at a massive disadvantage.
The problem is a 2+Ghz, possibly out of order, Arm chip with fast busses, big caches (which means no space for onboard peripherals) and so on would not be very good for the cellphone market. Also chip development costs a fortune - Qualcomm spent tens of millions on a custom Arm implementation
Overall, Qualcomm has made a huge investment in creating a custom implementation of the ARMv7 architecture. By way of comparison, Texas Instruments customized just the layout for the Cortex-A8 for its OMAP3 chips, and it has been reported that the process took 45 engineers working for a period of years. If so, Scorpion's development probably represents an investment on the order of tens of millions of dollars. And what's the payoff?
At first glance, it doesn't look like much-as noted earlier, Scorpion is expected to run at 1 GHz in a 65 nm process, which is slightly lower than the 1.1 GHz top speed that ARM currently quotes for the Cortex-A8 in 65 nm. Scorpion is quoted as providing 2100 DMIPS at 1 GHz; Cortex-A8 is quoted at 2000 DMIPS at the same speed. However, a notable difference is that the Cortex-A8 top speed is for a TSMC GP (general-purpose) process, while the Scorpion speed is for the LP (low-power) process. ARM quotes the speed of Cortex-A8 in an LP process as roughly 650 MHz, and although TI does not publicize the exact speed of the hand-crafted, low-power Cortex-A8 core used in its OMAP3 chips, BDTI has estimated that it runs at roughly 450 MHz. (BDTI's benchmark results for the Cortex-A8 are available at BDTIâ(TM)s website, www.BDTI.com.) Thus, Qualcomm expects Scorpion to run significantly faster than Cortex-A8 when both are implemented in the low-power processes commonly used for mobile applications.
Building an Arm that could compete with x86 would cost even more, they're up against Intel, AMD and Via all of whom already have faster chips and such a chip would not be very popular in the cellphone market. Actually the cellphone market is probably bigger than the desktop x86 market and Snapdragon is the top performer or close to it.
In some ways it reminds me of PowerPC. Apple ditched the architecture because the main PPC vendors wanted to concentrate on designing for the embedded world where they were selling in huge volumes to the detriment of the desktop world where Apple wanted to operate but where the volumes were tiny,
Pare away the heat sink and all that junk, add super small RAM and flash storage and... hand held computers (like the article notes from Toshiba). Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM... or they're going to miss out big time again.
People keep saying this sort of thing, but I really don't see it being viable. A Snapdragon is probably going to end up being at best the same speed as an Atom for native code. Windows 7 is probably quite portable and from the tests I've done on the Beta on Atoms might run quite okish on an 1Ghz Snapdragon if it were ported. Even there we're talking about a 1Ghz in order core with a memory controller designed for cellphone SDRAM. High performance desktop memory is really different to the stuff used in cellphones - the buses are narrower and slower. Here's are the details for an Atom
Note the bus speed, 533Mhz and the cache size, 512KB. By desktop standards the Atom is slow. Most Arm systems run memory much slower than this and have less cache. Look at the Snapdragon based Toshiba L01
See the thing is that the sort of memory you get in a cellphone is a lot slower than the stuff you get in a desktop because the power budget is so much less. If you want to run desktop applications or emulate an x86 that will really bite you.
Once you get past the OS it gets worse. Office is probably less portable than Windows and Office 200x runs terribly on an Atom and would be worse on Snapdragon given the lower performance memory. Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.
Of course maybe ARM will do a Jazelle style extension where common x86 instructions are turned into ARM ones via an extra pipeline stage. I think that would mean a Snapdragon chip would run x86 code say 90% as fast as an Atom at the same clockspeed. Still a 1Ghz Atom is not a quick chip.
Having to be anal about where you put stuff on your machine is to me a pain. I dont need that sort of stress wondering "Did I put something that could potentially damage me on there" whenever I lend away the machine.
Actually if it's a laptop I always worry that it might get stolen or I might lose it.
I use Truecrypt for all my files and password my account. Guest users, i.e. my girlfriend, get account with their name which is non admin. I backup the Truecrypt partition to a hard disk every time something important changes.
Make the goats.cx guy your screensaver and/or wallpaper image as a warning to this effect. That should keep most reasonable people the hell away from your laptop. if you run it through a red filter and make sure you only ever wear blue glasses, you should be safely protected and it'll hopefully just look like a black background.
Love your sig. Nothing like a little Slashdot drama between uppity macFags to cap off the night.
After the apocalypse I'm going to make Mac fans fight each other to the death in a Thunderdome style cage armed with spades. Winner will get to play with my iPod Touch for five minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see why them being unique is so surprising. Faces are unique after all. All of us have a unique genome, apart from identical twins. Still even twins have different fingerprints and hair follicles and so on are in different places. I guess when embryos develop the process for skin folding and hair follicle development is slightly random - i.e. the genes encode the probability of a fair follicle, not its exact location.
Silverlight runs on Macs now
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Silverlight#Operating_systems_and_web_browsers
There's the Moonlight package for Linux and since Adobe makes money licensing FlashLite to embedded devices it's reasonable to assume that Microsoft will do the same.
In fact the business model of Adobe Flash could be summarised as this: available on a majority of desktop platforms and with a free player but expensive to developers and expensive to port to other platforms, e.g. phones.
We develop for both OSs here, Vista and Windows 7.
I think the Internet has a good run, but it's now time to move to something more sophisticated. Like Microsoft Winternet 1.0.
The Basic edition will be very reasonable priced.
Muahahaha!
The 1930's. The decade that brought you the Depression, the Nazis, batshit crazy Japanese militarists attempting genocide in China and Stalin's purges. It sort of makes sense USB was invented then.
Does LaTeX have a 'hide codes' option?
It's not mainstream. It's like some Japanese guy put it to me "we think those guys reading violent pornography on the subway are weird too". I think these people exist in the UK but it's just that in the UK this stuff is illegal so it's not a good idea to look at it in public. More to the point, if you sat on the train reading this next to someone with kids they would flip out completely. Japanese people don't flip out and as far as I know the police ignore this sort of thing.
What I think is odd is that Japan has quite strict censorship for nudity in movies on TV for example, which these days is more or less acceptable in the UK.
Well yes and no. I wouldn't want to go to a bar with anyone that had fantasies about raping people. In fact I once worked in a very geeky company with someone who, when drunk, had on several occasions said things very much along those lines. What was interesting was how people reacted. As time went by people stoppen inviting him to stuff. In fact I noticed someone was emailing to an ALL-LONGSITENAME-OK list instead of ALL-LONGSITENAME-UK and what the difference was. He said that he cloned ALL-LONGSITENAME-UK into his own list and removed people that were widely regarded even there as being socially unacceptable. Obviously at that point I asked who he took off the list and it was only 2 people out of 100.
Now bear in mind these people were in the geekiest 1% of the population. And this guy was widely believed to be in bottom 2% in terms of socialisation even there, to the point where a consensus arose to not invite him to stuff.
He was plain creepy though - in the events the company organised where everyone got invited he kept turning up with different and very obviously underage girls each time.
Damnit, I was just working out how long a RapeRacer skin of TuxRacer would take.
Incidentally the odd thing about this is that controversy works. You could build the skin, knock a website and make a profit on the ads alone. Then again, bad taste stuff like this would probably get pulled from the Google index and the ad providers would probably blacklist you once someone complained.
Hmm maybe controversy doesn't work. Or maybe you need to be more subtle about how you troll people. There are loads of tech columns that get traffic because they are trolling. In a sense it reminds me of the Malcolm McLaren line about 'cash from chaos'.
Yeah and the tractor harvest in up 534% in the current Five Year plan, right, Comrade?
I think the most important task for bands that sing about the death of the music industry is to develop innovative new forms of distribution to maximize both their fans return on their investment and also their leveraging their own IP holdings. In many ways the task they face is strkingly similar to that faced by skilled professionals in other industries, particularly financial advisers who wish to be self employed following Thatcher's brilliant deregulation of the City in the 80's.
I work as an adviser for several punk bands. I always turn up in a smart designer suit and lecture them on economics. Which they seem appreciative of. However occasionally I've pointed out a few basic economic errors in their lyrics and suggested ways they could improve them without messing up the flow of the song. I also recommended they read Hayek's The Road to Serfdom and mentioned an essay by Milton Friedman. And actually I've written a few songs myself, about the economic liberalisation in the 80's and 90's in Chile and China.
For some reason at that point the meeting seemed to become a bit frosty.
Actually to be honest I don't bother to invoice them for the advice. I'm secretely filming the meetings for mockumentary I intend to distribute on the net for free.
There's a lot of money in Uranium mining in North Korea.
That's a horrible approach to economics and simply isn't true.
Imagine you've a city of 100,000 or so where 90% of people earn their money working on a massive copper
If 90% of the people in the town were working on a copper, wouldn't the bastard go down? I don't care how massive he is. Big chavs would be kicking and punching him, little chavspawn would jump on him and gnaw and burrow. I reckon the guy would be ex filth pretty quickly.
I saw the Staines massive attack a copper. They're much less than 90% of the town and most of them are under 16 and they're so weeded up they can't run. Didn't take long.
its lrn 2 engrish or l2e
noob
The Chrome people say that you're getting a patent license for H.264, etc. if you use Chrome. Fine.
The interesting question is "Does my patent license for H.264, etc. extend to any decoding, or only that done by Chrome?". Said in another way, is my patent license only good if I'm doing the decoding in Chrome or does it apply to decoding done by me? If it is the latter, then anyone who wants a patent license can just download Chrome -- now they have a free patent license.
I think the fact that if the patent license applied to decoding done by software other than Chrome then everyone could get a patent license strongly implies it doesn't. I.e. the patent holders won't sue Google and they won't sue users of Google's software. If those users use other software that decodes H.264 I can't believe that the patent holders have agreed not to sue them.
And this is what I was thinking. I'm very confused, but I'm also not an American. What does the Federal Trade Commission have to do with acting on illegal material such as the crazy stuff suggested by the article?
I'm an American and what's really happening is this. The corrupt Obama junta is trying to silence its critics by falsely labelling them spammers and child pornographers.
BARELY LEGAL TEENS! CHEAP V1AGRA!
They don't need to
http://windows7center.com/news/rumor-smash-windows-7-to-support-third-party-codecs/
Rafael from WithinWindows investigated and found that this "blocking" behaviour does exist, but it seems to be functioning in a way that indicates it is there temporarily. This was Microsoft's comment on the issue:
As we move toward the release of Windows 7, we have worked to add more codecs and file types to allow for a better user experience. We also allow Microsoft experiences to use codecs and other format technologies from third-party companies, just as we always have. Third party applications can use the Microsoft codecs or their own. Microsoft does not restrict the use of third-party codecs. - Microsoft Spokesperson
The possibility of Microsoft imposing such a strange restriction and alienating its many users seemed unlikely anyway.
I suppose you'd rather we all listened to folksongs sung by one legged ethnic minority lesbians whilst eating lentils in a commune. A commune of POETS and ARTISTS!. No Sir! That is not what America is about. America is about Bud, junk food, guitar riffs and callipygian dancers shot with a handycam.
45 engineer years was what they needed to take an Arm Cortex A8 and rework it changing the clock speed from 600Mhz to 1Ghz on a given process.
To compete with x86 you'd need to go quite a bit further than this. Actually I wonder if ARM is the right architecture for high performance desktop stuff - maybe it's a good architecture for simple single issue in order designs with shallow pipelines but not good if you want OOO, superscalar and superpipelined. The x86 chips AMD and Intel make tend to do all this stuff. They also break down x86 instructions into uops. No Arm chip does this but it seems to be key to decent x86 performance.
I don't have Hennessy and Patterson to hand here, but I wonder if Arm's elegant instruction set might have some issues for uberchips. Apparently MIPS had the most pipeline friendly instruction set, and that is a really stripped down machine compared to Arm. Back when IA64 came out people argued that MIPS like Risc chips like Alpha weren't ideal for superscalar implementations because the processor has to schedule in hardware. IA64 was supposed to be Explicitly Parallel. Of course it turned out to be a turkey.
Still my guess is that if you wanted to dethrone x86 you'd be better off picking an instruction set which was natural to implement in with OOO, superscalar and so on. Then like Risc it would be close to the way high performance desktop chips are implemented for a few generations and would have a built in advantage.
As far as I can tell they didn't do that with Snapdragon. It's a fast chip by Arm standards, but the memory subsystem is very similar to their previous chips. Then again that's probably because they're interested in selling chips for cellphones rather than notebooks.
Now Snapdragon is great for the cellphones but and I don't see why they should start to build chips for the netbook market where Arm is competing at a massive disadvantage.
The problem is a 2+Ghz, possibly out of order, Arm chip with fast busses, big caches (which means no space for onboard peripherals) and so on would not be very good for the cellphone market. Also chip development costs a fortune - Qualcomm spent tens of millions on a custom Arm implementation
http://www.insidedsp.com/Articles/tabid/64/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/238/Qualcomm-Reveals-Details-on-Scorpion-Core.aspx
Overall, Qualcomm has made a huge investment in creating a custom implementation of the ARMv7 architecture. By way of comparison, Texas Instruments customized just the layout for the Cortex-A8 for its OMAP3 chips, and it has been reported that the process took 45 engineers working for a period of years. If so, Scorpion's development probably represents an investment on the order of tens of millions of dollars. And what's the payoff?
At first glance, it doesn't look like much-as noted earlier, Scorpion is expected to run at 1 GHz in a 65 nm process, which is slightly lower than the 1.1 GHz top speed that ARM currently quotes for the Cortex-A8 in 65 nm. Scorpion is quoted as providing 2100 DMIPS at 1 GHz; Cortex-A8 is quoted at 2000 DMIPS at the same speed. However, a notable difference is that the Cortex-A8 top speed is for a TSMC GP (general-purpose) process, while the Scorpion speed is for the LP (low-power) process. ARM quotes the speed of Cortex-A8 in an LP process as roughly 650 MHz, and although TI does not publicize the exact speed of the hand-crafted, low-power Cortex-A8 core used in its OMAP3 chips, BDTI has estimated that it runs at roughly 450 MHz. (BDTI's benchmark results for the Cortex-A8 are available at BDTIâ(TM)s website, www.BDTI.com.) Thus, Qualcomm expects Scorpion to run significantly faster than Cortex-A8 when both are implemented in the low-power processes commonly used for mobile applications.
Building an Arm that could compete with x86 would cost even more, they're up against Intel, AMD and Via all of whom already have faster chips and such a chip would not be very popular in the cellphone market. Actually the cellphone market is probably bigger than the desktop x86 market and Snapdragon is the top performer or close to it.
In some ways it reminds me of PowerPC. Apple ditched the architecture because the main PPC vendors wanted to concentrate on designing for the embedded world where they were selling in huge volumes to the detriment of the desktop world where Apple wanted to operate but where the volumes were tiny,
Pare away the heat sink and all that junk, add super small RAM and flash storage and ... hand held computers (like the article notes from Toshiba). Microsoft better not be resting on its laurels and should either be beefing up Windows Mobile or porting Windows 7 to ARM ... or they're going to miss out big time again.
People keep saying this sort of thing, but I really don't see it being viable. A Snapdragon is probably going to end up being at best the same speed as an Atom for native code. Windows 7 is probably quite portable and from the tests I've done on the Beta on Atoms might run quite okish on an 1Ghz Snapdragon if it were ported. Even there we're talking about a 1Ghz in order core with a memory controller designed for cellphone SDRAM. High performance desktop memory is really different to the stuff used in cellphones - the buses are narrower and slower. Here's are the details for an Atom
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB73
Note the bus speed, 533Mhz and the cache size, 512KB. By desktop standards the Atom is slow. Most Arm systems run memory much slower than this and have less cache. Look at the Snapdragon based Toshiba L01
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=1855&view=1&c=toshiba_l01
It uses "mobile DDR SDRAM". I don't know the clock speed, but look at this
http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800457078_499486_NP_197bb814.HTM
Hynix claims 'fastest' 512Mbit mobile DDR SDRAM with a 185Mhz clock speed.
See the thing is that the sort of memory you get in a cellphone is a lot slower than the stuff you get in a desktop because the power budget is so much less. If you want to run desktop applications or emulate an x86 that will really bite you.
Once you get past the OS it gets worse. Office is probably less portable than Windows and Office 200x runs terribly on an Atom and would be worse on Snapdragon given the lower performance memory. Most Windows applications will not be ported and will run even worse in emulation - a Snapdragon emulating x86 will be unusably slow.
Of course maybe ARM will do a Jazelle style extension where common x86 instructions are turned into ARM ones via an extra pipeline stage. I think that would mean a Snapdragon chip would run x86 code say 90% as fast as an Atom at the same clockspeed. Still a 1Ghz Atom is not a quick chip.
Having to be anal about where you put stuff on your machine is to me a pain. I dont need that sort of stress wondering "Did I put something that could potentially damage me on there" whenever I lend away the machine.
Actually if it's a laptop I always worry that it might get stolen or I might lose it.
I use Truecrypt for all my files and password my account. Guest users, i.e. my girlfriend, get account with their name which is non admin. I backup the Truecrypt partition to a hard disk every time something important changes.
No, it tells you how many kisses he has had in his life.
I am betting it is an integer somewhere between -1 and 1
i ?
Make the goats.cx guy your screensaver and/or wallpaper image as a warning to this effect. That should keep most reasonable people the hell away from your laptop. if you run it through a red filter and make sure you only ever wear blue glasses, you should be safely protected and it'll hopefully just look like a black background.
Oh wow.
Love your sig. Nothing like a little Slashdot drama between uppity macFags to cap off the night.
After the apocalypse I'm going to make Mac fans fight each other to the death in a Thunderdome style cage armed with spades. Winner will get to play with my iPod Touch for five minutes.